How does asymptotic approximation follow in this scenario?

  • Thread starter Thread starter EngWiPy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Approximation
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the asymptotic behavior of a double sum involving random variables as M approaches infinity. The key point is that the author uses the law of large numbers to assert that the limit of the average of the sums converges to 1. Participants clarify the meaning of the symbols used, particularly the expectation operator E and the nature of the random variables h_i(l). There is a consensus that the asymptotic expression can be interpreted either as the ratio approaching 1 or the difference approaching 0 as M increases. A critical condition noted is the independence of the random variables h_i for different indices.
EngWiPy
Messages
1,361
Reaction score
61
Hello,

I am reading a paper, and the author claimed that in asymptotic sense as M goes to infinite:

\sum_{i=1}^M\sum_{l=0}^L|h_i(l)|^2=M

where:

\sum_{l=0}^L\mathbb{E}\left\{|h_i(l)|^2\right\}=1.

How is that asymptotic follows?

Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There are undefined symbols. What kind of things are hi(l)? What is the meaning of E?
 
mathman said:
There are undefined symbols. What kind of things are hi(l)? What is the meaning of E?

E is the expectation, and h are random variables.

I got it, it is just by using the law of large numbers.

Thanks
 
In the equation cited, what is asymptotic? Ratio -> 1 (true) or difference -> 0 (false)?
 
mathman said:
In the equation cited, what is asymptotic? Ratio -> 1 (true) or difference -> 0 (false)?

as M goes to infinite.
 
S_David said:
as M goes to infinite.

I know you mean as M -> ∞, but my question is what is supposed to happening as M -> ∞, expression divided by M -> 1 (true) or expression minus M -> 0 (false)?
 
mathman said:
I know you mean as M -> ∞, but my question is what is supposed to happening as M -> ∞, expression divided by M -> 1 (true) or expression minus M -> 0 (false)?

I am sorry, I did not understand you quiet well. Can you say it in different way, please?
 
I have the feeling that he is dividing by M.
 
chiro said:
I have the feeling that he is dividing by M.

If he is dividing by the M the result would be 1 not M.
 
  • #10
S_David said:
I am sorry, I did not understand you quiet well. Can you say it in different way, please?
Let ∑(M) be the double sum you are talking about. There are two ways of expressing the limit as M -> ∞, {∑(M)}/M -> 1 (true) or ∑(M) - M -> 0 (false).
 
  • #11
mathman said:
Let ∑(M) be the double sum you are talking about. There are two ways of expressing the limit as M -> ∞, {∑(M)}/M -> 1 (true) or ∑(M) - M -> 0 (false).

\lim_{M\xrightarrow{}\infty}\frac{1}{M}\sum_{i=1}^M\sum_{l=0}^L|h(l)|^2=1
 
  • #12
S_David said:
\lim_{M\xrightarrow{}\infty}\frac{1}{M}\sum_{i=1}^M\sum_{l=0}^L|h(l)|^2=1
True. The author is making use of one of the fundamental theorems of probability theory - the law of large numbers.
 
  • #13
mathman said:
True. The author is making use of one of the fundamental theorems of probability theory - the law of large numbers.

Yes, right. Thanks
 
  • #14
S_David said:
Yes, right. Thanks

There is one caveat: hi independent of hj for i ≠ j.
 
Back
Top